(no subject)

[David Kramer]

julesg at newebmail.com wrote, On 07/10/2004 05:40 PM:

By the way, why was this email, sent today, dated as last Saturday?

> The only thing I should say, since some of you have looked up my past work,
> is that while my compression technology is real, it probably is not
> practical, as in running on the X86 chip in a PC.  With the addition of a
> dedicated card with a VLSI chip, that would make it quite practical and
> probably heavily used.  And trust me, I've spoken to VC's, it's not a clear
> win -- because new computer technology is quite difficult to 'own', it seems
> to leak and spread.

I don't think any of us would question the value of such a system.  There are 
plenty of applications where horsepower is plentiful and time is not as much a 
consideration, particulary in the government.  This is especially true if the 
compression is cheap but the decompression is expensive (I don't know that it 
is, based on what I know about your system)

> And in case you haven't noticed, intellectual property is the next big thing
> in computing.  Protecting it that is...

Interesting statement to post on a mailing list promoting open source 
technologies, but time will tell.  We'll see if Red Hat or SCO goes bankrupt 
first.

> While I recognize that most of you won't believe my assertion, occasionally,
> with appropriate security considerations, I do provide demonstrations.

I think that's the crux of the problem.  There are innumerable references to 
you talking about your technology, defending it, and lots of people saying 
"show me", but I found not one reference to someone who said "Hey!  he showed 
it to me and it works!"

> fact I assume that a certain MIT prof, a good friend of mine, will decide to
> accept my offer eventually.  The reason he is afraid to at present, is that
> he doesn't want to be the target of people, probably many of you, who would
> flame him for not disclosing the basis of operation.

We are, in effect scientists.  If you set up your software on a computer, and 
someone hands you a large high-entropy binary file (yes, I understand this is 
one of your reqirements), and you can produce a vastly smaller file on the 
other side. pass that to another machine in a way that we can be sure the 
original corpus is not brought along too, and we can verify that the original 
corpus comes out of the second machine, then you have proven your technology 
works, no matter how it does so or how long it takes.  End of argument.  We do 
not need to know how it works to believe in it if we have proof of the 
outcome.  Not that we wouldn't be curious...

 > Before all this happened, I had thought about offering to do a demo at MIT
 > for BLU, but security would be a huge problem.

I'm sure if you really were willing to give a demo at a meeting, we could find 
two fairly high-powered computers to bring in for the test.

I'm not sure what your security concerns are.  You can bring the software on 
an encrypted USB device or something.

> I tried to schedule a demo for aiTRAN (a
> computer algebra system I developed for programer's,) but couldn't get the
> leader person (I forget his name,) to plug me in.
> 
> Just as well, especially now...

Again, nobody has said that you were wrong, just unproven. That is until you 
threatened to sue one of our members for saying so, which is when the personal 
attacks started.  Your doing, not ours.


-- 
DDDD   David Kramer         david at thekramers.net       http://thekramers.net
DK KD
DKK D  "...Just remember what the MPAA says: horrific, deplorable violence
DK KD  is OK, as long as people don't say any naughty words."
DDDD                                                           Cartman's Mom